Education the Future of America

REPORT BRIEF THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION THE FUTURE OF AMERICA

Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA REPORT BRIEF Publications of the Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education

A Primer on the College Student Journey (American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2016)

The Complex Universe of Alternative Postsecondary Credentials and Pathways, Jessie Brown and Martin Kurzweil, Ithaka S+R (American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2017)

Undergraduate Financial Aid in the United States, Judith Scott Clayton (American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2017)

The Economic Impact of Increasing College Completion, Sophia Koropeckyj, Chris Lafakis, and Adam Ozimek, Moody’s Analytics (American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2017)

Policies and Practices to Support Undergraduate Teaching Improvement, Aaron M. Pallas, Anna Neumann, and Corbin M. Campbell (American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2017)

The Future of Undergraduate Education, The Future of America (American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2017) COMMISSION ON THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION

REPORT BRIEF THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION THE FUTURE OF AMERICA

american academy of arts & sciences Cambridge, Massachusetts © 2017 by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. All rights reserved. isbn: 0-87724-119-8 This publication is available online at https://www.amacad.org/cfue. The views expressed in this publication are those held by the contributors and are not necessarily those of the Officers and Members of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. Please direct inquiries to: American Academy of Arts & Sciences 136 Irving Street Cambridge, ma 02138 Telephone: 617-576-5000 Fax: 617-576-5050 Email: [email protected] Web: www.amacad.org CONTENTS

Acknowledgments vii

Introduction 1

Priority One Recommendations Strengthen the Student Educational Experience 8

Priority Two Recommendations Increase Completion and Reduce Inequities 12

Priority Three Recommendations Control Costs and Increase Affordability 16

Considerations on the Further Future 21

Conclusion 23

Endnotes 25

Appendix A Commission Members, Staff, and Funder 26

Appendix B Groups and Individuals Consulted 27

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Future of Undergraduate Education, The Future of America is published at a critical moment in our nation’s history, when so many long-standing assumptions about who we are as a people, and where we are headed, have been called into question.

For over a century, we have pursued grand ambitions—groundbreaking scientific discoveries, life-changing technological advances, hard-won social change—and emerged ever stronger, if still imperfect, from our struggles. In recent years, however, we appear to have lost some of that motivating enthusiasm, the optimism that has always lifted us as a people. As we grapple with persistent social inequalities, widening political divisions, prolonged international conflict, and intensifying environmental challenges, we often seem more concerned with the limits of our present capabilities than in the realization of our dreams.

If we are to regain our momentum, as we have after so many other challenging moments in our past, we will have to find new ways to channel our inexhaustible creativity, restore a measure of civility to the national discourse, and bridge our differences. In short, we will have to recommit to the promise of education—to study the lessons of the past, analyze the requirements of the present, and imagine the innovations that will brighten our future. Education is not the solution to every problem, but it is often the best tool we have at our disposal, and there is good reason to believe it has been the primary source of our greatest achievements over the past century.

This report offers practical and actionable recommendations to improve the undergraduate experience. But in its practicality, it is motivated by the highest ideals: faith that every person, from every background, can succeed in America when given the proper training and preparation; con- fidence that our existing institutions of higher education can and will evolve to meet the needs of today’s and future students; and an unwavering commitment to the free exchange of ideas as the basis of a creative, productive, and democratic society. As stated in the conclusion of this report, “Progress is not guaranteed, and good things will happen only with sustained effort, but if we can sustain focus on the work, combining patience with urgency, we can, through undergraduate education, make great advances as individuals and as a nation.”

The Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education, which authored this report, was created in 2015 by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in response to a suggestion from Dr. Vartan Gregorian, president of Carnegie Corporation of New York. Dr. Gregorian observed that the context and expectations for American undergraduate education had changed dramatically over the past few decades, as our colleges and universities opened their doors to new populations of students (young and old, traditional and nontraditional, immigrant and international) and that it was time for a new study to examine the student educational journey. He therefore asked the American Academy to examine the current state of American undergraduate education, project the nation’s short-term and long-term educational needs, and offer recommendations for strengthening all aspects of undergraduate education. We are grateful for his encouragement and for the support of Carnegie Corporation.

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are also very fortunate to have had the leadership of our distinguished cochairs, Michael McPherson, president emeritus of the Spencer Foundation, and Roger Ferguson, president and chief executive officer oftiaa . Their rigorous approach to the task, generosity of spirit, and deep knowledge of higher education have been invaluable to this effort. Thanks as well to all the Com- mission members (see Appendix A for a complete list), whose dedication and creativity enriched this effort and who modeled the kind of civil discourse and consensus-building that is, itself, one of the primary goals of undergraduate education. In preparation for this final report, they also published several occasional papers that elaborate many of the themes delineated in the pages that follow: A Primer on the College Student Journey, The Complex Universe of Alternative Postsec- ondary Credentials and Pathways, Undergraduate Financial Aid in the United States, Policies and Practices to Support Undergraduate Teaching Improvement, and The Economic Impact of Increasing College Completion. All of these publications are now available at www.amacad.org/cfue.

Over a two-year period, the Commission sought advice from a wide range of experts and organizations, all listed in Appendix B. We are grateful to all of them for their insights and suggestions. We also thank the following individuals for their time and counsel: David Autor, Larry Bacow, Cynthia Barnhart, Christopher Bishop, Derek Bok, Phil Bredesen, Louise Bryson, Mary Sue Cole- man, Ron Daniel, Michael Dennin, Nicholas Dirks, Robert Haas, Dale Jorgenson, Jerry Kagan, Nan Keohane, Raynard Kington, Richard Light, Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot, Martin Lipton, Stan Litow, Tony Marx, David Oxtoby, Robert Pozen, David Pritchard, Virginia Sapiro, Alfred Spector, Jerry Speyer, and Mitchell Stevens.

Thanks as well to the members of the Academy’s Board of Directors, Council, and Trust for their leadership, advice, and support for this project, and to the Academy staff who ably served this Commission and prepared this report: Francesca Purcell, Eliza Berg, John Tessitore, Phyllis Bendell, Alison Franklin, Heather Mawhiney, Scott Raymond, and Peter Walton; and consultants Lara Couturier and Richard Kazis.

This report is the culmination of a long process of research and deliberation, but it is only the beginning of the effort to strengthen undergraduate education in America. We will need many willing partners to help advance our recommendations. We look forward to working with you, and to hearing your thoughts about this report, in the months and years ahead.

Jonathan F. Fanton President American Academy of Arts and Sciences

viii Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education INTRODUCTION

Our nation’s effort over two centuries to pro- challenge of quantity in American undergrad- vide education to everyone who lives and works uate education, of enrolling as many students within the United States is an expression of a as possible, is increasingly a challenge of educa- core belief, one that has survived a long history tional quality—of making sure that all students of challenges: that all people, through learning, receive the education they need to succeed, can achieve higher goals for themselves and for that they are able to complete the studies they society as a whole. begin, and that they can do all of this affordably, without mortgaging the very future they Progress toward universal education in the seek to improve. The breadth and diversity of United States has been slow and difficult, but today’s undergraduate population represent a the trend over time has been toward greater great national achievement, but only if we can access and greater opportunity for more peo- ensure that all students receive the rigorous ple of different regions and backgrounds. In the knowledge and preparation they seek when they nineteenth century, the United States established enroll—the education they need to succeed in

What was once a challenge of quantity in American undergraduate education, of enrolling as many students as possible, is increasingly a challenge of educational quality— of making sure that all students receive the education they need to succeed, that they are able to complete the studies they begin, and that they can do all of this affordably, without mortgaging the very future they seek to improve. local, public “common schools” for young chil- their personal, professional, and civic lives. This dren. In the first half of the twentieth century, is, in fact, a critical test for the American com- high school became a universal experience for mitment to education, as the decades-long effort young adults. And in the second half of the twen- to welcome more students from different back- tieth century, colleges and universities expanded grounds, and to accommodate a more varied set in size and number, as well as in academic offer- of student expectations, has been so successful ings, to introduce more students of all ages and that colleges and universities, policy-makers, backgrounds to the kinds of opportunities once business and philanthropy leaders, and students reserved only for a social and economic elite. and their families are now compelled to adjust to this next national challenge. Our challenge today is to help the nation’s extraordinary institutions of higher education Almost 90 percent of high school graduates can work more effectively and efficiently for students expect to enroll in an undergraduate institution in the twenty-first century. What was once a at some point during their young adulthood, and

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 1 INTRODUCTION

smaller percentages continue their education A below). About one-third of enrolled students through career and technical schools, apprentice- are over 25 years old, and almost 40 percent are ships, work-based training programs, and other enrolled on a part-time basis.2 alternatives.1 Every fall, over 17 million students of all ages and backgrounds enroll at approxi- Their motivations are varied, perhaps even mately 4,700 colleges and universities, attending unique to each individual, but in aggregate Amer- either in-person or virtually, to earn an ever-wid- icans are looking to undergraduate education to ening array of certificates and associate’s and bac- help them navigate a time of accelerated demo- calaureate degrees. Eighty percent enroll in the graphic, technological, and political change. nation’s public community colleges and state uni- They find themselves living in a nation that is versities, while others attend a diversity of private increasingly heterogeneous. In today’s public nonprofit and for-profit institutions (see Figure

FIGURE A: Enrollment Rates for Undergraduates by Age and Type of Institution

# 2%

38% 38% 16% 6% ALL # 1%

34% 45% 17% 2% <25

# 3%

46% 25% 11% 14% Undergraduates by Age 25+

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

# Rounds to Zero Public 2-Year Public 4-Year Private Nonproﬁt 2-Year

Private Nonprofit 4-Year Private For-Profit 2-Year Private For-Profit 4-Year

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, Table 303.50, “Total Fall Enrollment in Degree-Granting Postsecondary Institutions, by Level of Enrollment, Control and Level of Institution, Attendance Status, and Age of Student: 2013,” https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d14/tables/dt14_303.50.asp?current=yes; and National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, Table 303.70, “Total Undergraduate Fall Enrollment in Degree-Granting Postsecondary Institutions, by Attendance Status, Sex of Student, and Control and Level of Institution: Selected Years, 1970 through 2025,” https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_303.70.asp?current=yes.

2 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education discourse, diversity is often reduced to the informed policy decisions. They also need prediction that, by 2040, there will be no a set of sophisticated critical thinking skills racial or ethnic majority in the United States.3 in order to navigate a media landscape that But the diversification of America can be includes the rapid exchange of information, described and documented in other ways, often at the expense of careful analysis and across aspects of religious belief, gender, lan- reasoned debate, and in which fact and fiction guage, political affiliation, and regional iden- are not easily distinguishable. Perhaps most tification, to name a few. In every case, the important of all, they need institutions that public face of America has changed dramat- welcome and protect a robust but respectful ically over the last few decades, and every exchange of ideas as the basis of all innova- American can now expect to come into tion and the very essence of a democracy. contact with histories and worldviews quite different from their own, on a more regular Our educational institutions can and must pro- basis. The development of an increasingly vide, at scale, the knowledge and skills that are interconnected global economy will only required to help every American make sense of reinforce this sense of profound ethnic, cul- and thrive in a future society that will be even tural, and linguistic change. more diverse, technological, and complicated Workers of the future can also expect to than the present. The pressures on our colleges change occupations and careers several times and universities are particularly acute. A grow- and may even end up in jobs and industries ing proportion of American occupations will that do not now exist. While it is impossible require college credentials at the baccalaureate, to predict future work trends with great accu- associate’s, and certificate levels because jobs will racy, emerging technologies will continue to depend upon increasingly technical bodies of replace routine functions across many job knowledge or because the more general skills and categories at all levels, even as they create experiences that undergraduate education pro- new opportunities for workers in hundreds vides—scientific and civic understanding, critical of fields, including medicine and healthcare, thinking and “soft skills,” clarity of thought and manufacturing, and communications. These expression, and the ability to work in teams—will challenges will be amplified by the increasing be considered more desirable in every field and competitiveness of other nations within the profession. A college education also correlates to global economy, including the diversifying a host of other outcomes that most Americans skill sets of foreign workers. find desirable. College graduates enjoy more time spent with their families and prove to be And democratic governance will become more active in their communities as volunteers. much more complicated as a result of these The voting rate among college graduates is nearly demographic and technological changes. twice as high as the rate for high school gradu- Engaged citizens already require real scien- ates.4 They tend to exercise more and report tific and technological understanding—as better health through the course of their lives. well as a working knowledge of history, eco- College graduates report having more interesting nomics, civics, and the arts—in order to make and rewarding work than nongraduates.5 And

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 3 INTRODUCTION

the economic benefits associated with a college country lag behind their urban peers. These dis- degree are clear: on average, college graduates parities mirror and reinforce other social inequi- earn approximately $1 million more than high ties, and are an obstacle to social progress. They school graduates.6 Part of this difference is due also represent a significant challenge to an edu- to college graduates’ higher employment rates: cation system that has long prioritized the expan- for example, in 2016, the unemployment rate for sion of access, especially when many who enroll high school graduates was 5.2 percent compared but do not graduate are unable to repay student to only 2.7 percent for bachelor’s degree holders loan debt and are, therefore, worse off financially and 3.6 percent for associate’s degree holders.7 than when they started. True equity requires that students from all backgrounds have an opportu- But to realize the full benefits of an undergradu- nity to receive a quality, affordable education and ate education, students must be able to complete that they can complete their degrees in a reason- their degrees. Our undergraduate institutions, able period of time. as a whole, are more successful in enrolling students than they are in graduating them. By one The United States now ranks 11th among the 34 measure, only about 60 percent of students who Organization for Economic Cooperation and pursue a bachelor’s degree actually complete one. Development countries in the percentage of Similarly, only about 30 percent who pursue a its 25- to 34-year-olds who hold an associate’s certificate or associate’s degree ever earn the cre- degree or higher. Less than half (46.5 percent) dentials they seek. In addition, completion rates, of all Americans in this age group hold a degree, compared with 69 percent in South Korea and To realize 59 percent in Canada.8 There are many reasons the full benefits for these differences, including the social, economic, historical, and geographic challenges of an undergraduate of serving a nation as large and diverse as the education, students must United States. There are also many reasons why an American student might postpone or be able to complete cease their pursuit of a degree. Indeed, there is their degrees. no single model for a successful undergraduate experience, and the diversity of educational when analyzed by gender, race, ethnicity, and pathways is a particular strength of the Ameri- socioeconomic status, are troublingly unequal. can approach. Nevertheless, now that most high Women complete at higher rates than men, White school students have access to some college and Asian students complete at higher rates than option, the nation’s future success—in business Black and Hispanic students, and high-income and civic life, at home and abroad—depends students complete at higher rates than their on its ability to realize the untapped potential low-income peers. Students who attend part- of the many students who begin but do not time, mostly working adults and parents, com- complete their undergraduate education. The plete at much lower rates than those who attend completion of a few college courses is not a suf- full-time. And students from rural areas of the ficient education in the twenty-first century.

4 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education Although the public discourse tends to focus on the most extreme examples of burdensome student debt, the larger issues reside with students who take out relatively smaller loan amounts but never earn a credential.

Among the primary obstacles to completion for undergraduate institutions as they adjust to a many students is the sheer cost of an undergrad- growing and shifting student population. uate degree. Close to 60 percent of all college graduates take out loans averaging a total debt The American Academy of Arts and Sciences of $20,000 per student—approximately the cost organized its Commission on the Future of of a brand-new economy car. But the problem Undergraduate Education to take a broad view of student debt is far more serious for students of undergraduate education in all of its man- who drop out than for students who graduate. ifestations and to recommend ways to ensure While 9 percent of college graduates default that students in every program and institution on their loans, the default rate among students receive the education they need to succeed in who do not complete their degrees is almost 25 the twenty-first century. In this final report, the percent. Although the public discourse tends to Commission offers a comprehensive national focus on the most extreme examples of burden- strategy encompassing three broad recommen- some student debt, the larger issues reside with dations to achieve this goal: students who take out relatively smaller loan 1. Ensure that all students have high-quality amounts but never earn a credential. educational experiences. Every sector bears some responsibility for 2. Increase overall completion rates and addressing these challenges, and the entire reduce inequities among different student nation needs to begin a new conversation populations at every level of undergraduate about how to distribute the responsibility for education. undergraduate education. Institutions need to 3. Manage college costs and improve the devote far more attention to and support for affordability of undergraduate education. the quality of teaching and the teaching workforce and become more purposeful, effective, Action on these recommendations can and and efficient—reengineering their systems to should begin soon, and many will take 10–20 focus on student completion. At the same time, years before they are realized. The fourth and government agencies need to focus their sights final section of the report takes a more specu- on students and communities in real need. lative approach, looking to a further future And the private sector, including philanthro- through the lenses of several factors—each pies, can help to advance these goals through a plausible and pertinent to the Commission’s variety of partnerships and approaches to assist principal goals of quality, completion, and

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 5 INTRODUCTION

Our nation’s investment in education has always implied a compact among the generations, in which each generation has accepted some responsibility for the success of the next. That sustained effort, over 200 years, has resulted in the network of colleges and universities that is among the most significant contributors to America’s intellectual and economic strength, the engines that drive the American Dream. affordability—which could move in very dif- In time, as teaching methodologies evolve ferent directions: our country’s level of social and delivery systems become less expensive cohesion; the characteristics of the workforce; and easier to manage, digital technologies will the level of access to information and educa- help expand educational opportunities for all tional technologies; and unforeseen natural students. Some advances, like the growing use or human-generated global challenges. The of predictive analytics in student advising, are report ends by offering priority research areas already changing the way institutions serve to advance the work toward a strengthened and their students. But such innovations have been more affordable undergraduate education for a local and slow to spread across the higher edu- greater share of Americans. cation landscape. Taking up the challenges of improved performance cannot wait, however; In developing this report, the Commission drew they must be addressed now or risk failing the upon a vast array of innovative and important talented students of today and tomorrow. practices, policies, and studies underway across the country, as well as successful projects at every A recent, comprehensive research project on level of undergraduate education. Through- social mobility tracked about 30 million col- out the report, promising practices are high- lege students, charting the percentage from lighted either in green or included under a green lower-income families who then moved up the “Promising Practice” banner. Additional prom- income distribution by their early 30s. Among ising practices may be found at www.amacad its many findings, the study reveals that open .org/cfue. It assembled evidence supporting the access colleges and universities serve as major notion that undergraduate education institutions catalysts propelling low-income students into in every sector can achieve meaningful progress middle-class lives. But it also suggests that as long as they focus on quality and completion American institutions of higher education are as primary goals, limit costs and obstacles in the not meeting their potential.9 pursuit of these goals, and partner with other entities to create new efficiencies, share best Our nation’s investment in education has always practices, and build economies of scale. implied a compact among the generations, in

6 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education which each generation has accepted some sis focuses on the economic side of this devel- responsibility for the success of the next. That opment, there is every reason to believe that sustained effort, over 200 years, has resulted in an investment in students would yield other, the network of colleges and universities that less easily quantified returns as well, including is among the most significant contributors to gains such as greater intercultural understand- America’s intellectual and economic strength, ing, increased civic participation leading to a the engines that drive the American Dream. stronger democracy, and more rewarding lives Some historians even suggest that America’s for graduates. In the same way that the nation rise as an economic power, beginning in the must reinvest in its physical infrastructure— nineteenth century and continuing through roads, bridges, railways, and so on—as a stim- the 1960s, can be traced to the rapid growth of ulus for communication and commerce of all educational opportunity in the United States, kinds, the United States should commit to a including the expansion of undergraduate edu- comparable reinvestment in our existing education, in contrast to the more gradual broad- cational infrastructure, including undergradu- ening of educational opportunity in Europe.10 ate education, in order to realize the productive We now have the potential to provide every potential of all Americans. American with an undergraduate degree, but over the past 30 years, the generational com- Ultimately, the future success of the nation will pact has weakened, investments have been depend on its citizens’ level of commitment to reduced, and the rate of attainment lags behind a revised, inclusive ideal of an educated soci- our nation’s needs. ety in which every member is well-prepared to succeed and thrive. The national strategy the To better understand the scope of the invest- Commission recommends certainly requires ments required to reverse this course, and to some sacrifices, including sensible investments help measure the benefits of renewed invest- to assist students in need and to encourage a ment, the Commission engaged a leading eco- more concerted national effort to share, adopt, nomic consulting firm, Moody’s Analytics. and bring to scale successful programs and best Their analysis indicates that an ambitious yet practices that enhance the student experience achievable improvement in college completion and spread the benefits of innovation more rates would require substantial investments equitably across the nation. But the costs of over a decade and more, but the longer-term such a strategy are far outweighed by the ben- effect on the economy would be a significant efits to individual students, to local communi- improvement in the productivity of the Ameri- ties, to the nation, and to the world. can economy and a resultant gain in the nation’s standard of living.11 One model, based on a 20-year projection, forecasts an annual growth in gdp that is nearly 10 percent higher than it would be without the program—an increase large enough to repay initial investments and continue to grow the economy. While the analy-

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 7 NATIONAL PRIORITY ONE

Strengthen the Student Educational Experience

Priority One Recommendations

ENSURE THAT ALL STUDENTS—WHATEVER THEIR PROGRAM OF STUDY—HAVE HIGH-QUALITY EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCES THAT PREPARE THEM FOR SUCCESS IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY.

Too little attention is paid in undergraduate education to the educational experience itself and, in particular, to the challenge of ensuring that the 17 million diverse college students in many types of programs are learning and mastering knowledge, skills, and dispositions that will help them succeed in the twenty-first-century United States. Moreover, these students face the growing challenges of a changing and more competitive global economy in which they are competing against highly motivated and trained students throughout the world. For this reason, the Commission’s recommendations intentionally begin with the educational experience, with student learning. All college graduates—regardless of their major or the credential they will earn—need their programs of study to impart a forward-looking combination of academic knowledge and practical skills so they are prepared for both economic success and civic engagement. Today, the long-standing debate over the value of a liberal arts education versus a more applied postsecondary program presents a false choice. College educators need to adjust their program curricula and learning expectations accordingly. And students need to see the ability to work and learn with others, and to disagree and debate respectfully, as a skill essential for a high quality of life and a future of economic success and effective democratic citizenship.

The Commission recognizes that advancing the broad learning agenda advocated here—and advocating for more attention to the teaching enterprise itself—will remain difficult until more sophisticated and useful ways of measuring what students actually learn are developed. Redress- ing this lack of good data is a high priority. The Commission calls for far greater attention to and support for the quality of college teaching and the teaching workforce. Students learn in many different settings, including through peer interactions, co- and extracurricular activities, and self-motivated exploration. Ultimately, though, making undergraduate learning stronger and more rigorous will depend upon how undergraduate education invests in the teaching skills of its faculty and the kind of institutional and systemic commitment that is made.

Widespread inattention to teaching quality in the preparation, selection, and 1 assessment of faculty is a major obstacle to improved undergraduate student learning. University systems and individual campuses, academic departments, and disciplinary associations all have roles to play:

Master’s and doctoral programs that produce college teaching fac- a ulty should integrate meaningful and explicit teacher training opportunities.

8 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education Institutions must make a systemic commitment to the improvement b of college teaching, a commitment that acknowledges and rewards good teaching practices that are grounded in the learning sciences and an understanding of the variety of experiences and learning styles students bring to campuses. This commitment will most likely require ongoing review of faculty teaching practices; analyzing the faculty incentive system; making mentoring and other structured resources available to faculty throughout their teaching careers; and including teaching quality as a key part of tenure evaluation and contract renewal decision-making processes. Much of this work must take place in collaboration with academic departments.

Disciplinary associations should lead research and professional c development efforts exploring the relationship between teaching practices and student learning.

Colleges and universities have the opportunity and the responsibility to bring 2 together students from different backgrounds to create intellectual and social connections in ways that sustain and enrich American democracy. Relatedly, faculty and staff all need training and support to make possible campus cultures and classes that fully encourage active listening, discussion, and debate on controversial topics informed by the rigors of reason and evidence. Colleges and universities constitute one of the most important sites where people from various backgrounds and perspectives interact, learn with and from one another, and grapple with difference. Being prepared to teach in an increasingly contentious and fractured world, where diversity is crucial, is difficult.

Recognizing the challenges associated with greater numbers of short-term, non- 3 tenure instructors, any effort to improve undergraduate teaching and learning will require providing nontenure-track faculty with stable professional working environments and careers. The trend toward increased employment of short-term, nontenure-track faculty in undergraduate teaching will persist as long as colleges are under pressure to keep costs down and universities continue to produce more PhDs in some fields than are likely to find tenure-track employment. Good teaching need not require tenure-track faculty in every case, but it does require that faculty be supported and rewarded for doing their work well:

As they hire nontenure-track faculty who concentrate on teach- a ing—a growing share at many institutions across the country—colleges and universities should aim to make these positions full-time with longer-term contracts and a clear voice in governance, relying less on short-term, part-time instructors. These positions should respect profes-

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 9 NATIONAL PRIORITY ONE

Strengthen the Student Educational Experience

sional norms of academic freedom and provide a voice in university governance and the opportunity to build successful professional lives with reasonable benefits and job security.

Support and integrate faculty who teach on a part-time basis, and b who are recruited for their specialized expertise but who do not necessarily want to pursue an academic track, in a way that suits their more flexible needs.

Ensure that faculty from a diversity of backgrounds are equitably c represented across all instructional categories.

All college credentials—certificates and associate’s and bachelor’s degrees— 4 should incorporate academic, career, and civic knowledge and skills as a foundation for rewarding and productive lives and careers. In workplaces continually impacted by technological advances, employers value graduates who possess a broad technical, social, and entrepreneurial skillset, as well as the ongoing motivation to develop and apply new skills. Employers have a key role in helping graduates obtain these capacities. At the same time, the complexities of contemporary society demand citizens who understand the values and behaviors that lead to active civic engagement and contribute to a healthy democracy. Undergraduate learners need meaningful opportunities to develop and integrate knowledge and skills in the classroom and through cocurricular experiences such as co-op programs and internships, research, international study, or service that can help them improve their economic prospects, effectively navigate their personal and public worlds, and continue to learn throughout their lifetimes. Even in short-duration certificate programs, technical and academic knowledge should be augmented by curricular redesign that strengthens practical skills such as communication, problem-solving, and teamwork.

Develop more reliable measures of student learning gains, since knowing what 5 students have learned and can do is a critically important measure of college value. The focus on student learning as a means to understand and evaluate the effectiveness of a college credential is a valuable addition to what have traditionally been imperfect proxy measures used in college rankings systems such as admission rates and endowment sizes. However, colleges and universities remain in the earliest stages of finding ways to measure and report on student learning within and across undergraduate institutions, as well as how to best convey aggregated levels of learning to the general public. Learning gains should be disaggregated by subgroups that include socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and gender. Greater attention should be paid to

10 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education how other countries and their institutions address this problem and seek to measure actual learning in their schools.

Further experimentation with strategies for teaching and supporting students 6 in online, “hybrid,” and technology-supported environments, including new models where conventional teaching responsibilities are divided across multiple individuals, is needed to assess their effectiveness and to help instructors teach well in these formats. Online courses and other technology-rich teaching innovations have the potential to offer much greater access, flexibility, and learning opportunities to students. Development of these innovations across undergraduate education, within existing institutions, and through new institutions is still at an early stage with promising potential. However, that potential has not yet been fully realized. Rigorous assess- ments are rare and high-quality evidence shows mixed results. In general, but particularly for lower-income and first-generation college-goers, existing technology simply cannot substitute for in-person instruction but requires a “high-tech/high- touch” approach.

Federal and state government should invest in a research and development 7 strategy that increases the knowledge base regarding new models for design- ing, delivering, and assessing learning. Given the limited research base and mixed results to date, the Commission supports an evidence-based approach to the introduction of technology-based or technology-assisted education models. Outcomes should be disaggregated by key population groups, particularly those such as low-income, minority, and first-generation students. Results should be freely shared and dissemi- nated across institutions and among researchers.

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 11 NATIONAL PRIORITY TWO

Increase Completion and Reduce Inequities

Priority Two Recommendations

INCREASE COMPLETION RATES AND REDUCE INEQUITIES AMONG DIFFERENT STUDENT POPULATIONS.

The Commission envisions a future that depends on most Americans obtaining and benefiting from high-quality undergraduate education. Too few students who start at an American college or university complete their programs, and systematic variations in completion are linked to family income level, race and ethnicity, and gender. Many students who leave college without a degree are worse off than when they entered, unable to repay student loan debt. Low completion rates have been stubbornly resistant to improvement and require a serious redesign of institutional processes informed by data, deep partnerships with other entities, and a supportive state and federal environment. If a quality undergraduate education is the key to opportunity in the twenty- first century—an open door to a wider world—it should not be subject to a means test. The stakes, for individual citizens and for the country as a whole, are much too high. Students who will be entering colleges and universities over the next 20–30 years will come from all cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds; they will earn their education through an expanding variety of modes and institutions, according to schedules of their own making; and they will, like past cohorts, face multiple barriers to success. These students will need to complete their degrees. Colleges and universities, businesses, community-based organizations, and state and federal governments all have a role to play in this massive endeavor. The Commission makes the following recommendations for improvement in areas related to completion.

College and university leadership, with the full engagement of faculty and 1 staff, must make completion a top institutional priority, with a clear focus on understanding the diverse needs of students. Institutional resource allocation decisions must be viewed through the lens of whether investments are likely to increase student completion without compromising quality. More large-scale experimentation and research are needed, as is a commitment to continuous improvement by experimenting institutions. Multiple interventions should be integrated in coherent, scalable efforts:

Data collection should enable institution-specific insights through a nuanced analyses and should support rigorous evaluation and careful assessment of completion-related student interventions. Institu- tions must be able to analyze, compare, and report student-level data on persistence and progression, disaggregated by student characteristics that include family income, first-generation college-going status, enrollment status, race and ethnicity, and gender.

12 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education Students should have opportunities to make meaningful, person- b alized connections with faculty and staff. There is strong evidence that active guidance and interventions grounded in good data are valuable in promoting student success.

More attention must be paid to understanding and assisting stu- c dents from groups with the lowest completion rates. Summer bridge programs, accelerated remediation, and the provision of emergency funds are examples of proven strategies that benefit students who struggle to graduate.

Expand experimentation with and research on guided pathways designs, 2 which already help many institutions increase completion and reduce time- to-degree and excess credits. Design elements include clear guidelines for students to earn credentials and to further their education or career employment, mapped so course sequences and postcompletion choices are transparent; faster and better on-ramps to college-level learning for underprepared students; strong, ongoing guidance and mentoring on academic and career decision-making; and technology- assisted advising that keeps students on track to completion. Many of these reforms also have implications for greater efficiency in college and university operations, particularly when measured in terms of cost per graduate.

Work toward a new national understanding of and approach to student trans- 3 fer undergirded by an openness to evaluating, recognizing, and applying college-level learning that takes place at multiple institutions through various models. One-third of college students change institutions at least once, and about half of public university graduates began their studies in community colleges. But many lose credits, do not have their credits accepted, or even drop out along the way, especially students from underrepresented populations. This obligates both public and private colleges and universities as well as state policy-makers to work collaboratively to align learning programs and expectations across institutions and sectors, including implementing a transferable general education core, defined transfer pathway maps within popular disciplines, and transfer-focused advising systems that help students anticipate what it will take for them to transfer without losing momentum in their chosen field. Beyond this, a growing number of providers that are not colleges or universities offer pieces of educational experiences that are comparable to college-level learning. New efforts and strategies are thus required to measure and afford recognition to college-level learning that takes place outside the bounds of traditional and familiar college offerings.

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 13 NATIONAL PRIORITY TWO

Increase Completion and Reduce Inequities

Employer partnerships with colleges and universities play an important part in 4 improving college completion rates and helping students understand the rele- vance of their education to future employment, develop important workplace skills, and explore potential career pathways. Such partnerships—which include internships and co-op programs, mentoring, and research opportunities—also often include curricular consultations to help ensure students are prepared with the knowledge and skills needed for the workforce. New models in which colleges collaborate with businesses and high schools to create curricular pathways and provide professional mentoring and workplace internships to students especially show great promise.

Federal and state government leadership should enact comprehensive and 5 coordinated strategies to make college completion a top national and state priority. Both state and federal governments should use discretionary funds to make competitive grants that encourage evidence-based approaches to improving completion, including promoting informed program choices, limiting excess credits, reducing developmental coursework, and redesigning curricula to postcompletion success:

State leaders should determine their state’s numerical educational a attainment goals, communicate and promote these objectives to their residents, and coordinate with colleges and universities and other public and private entities to achieve these goals. More specifically, states can help set meaningful stretch goals for increasing college completion rates; track improvement by population subgroup by utilizing state longitudinal data systems; and support campuses through targeted institutional allocations and student financial aid.

The federal government should build a student unit record data b system—removing identifying information—to understand institutional, state, and national trends on college outcomes.

Colleges and universities should provide all college-going students and their 6 families with easy access to accurate and relevant information to inform their college choices, including the actual costs of the academic program to student and family, the likelihood of completing the program, and the prospects for employment or further education after graduation. Given the high sticker cost of college and the difficulty of choosing among myriad possible institutions, programs, and credentials, better information must be coupled with active guidance and support that is person- alized and technology-assisted in order to facilitate decision-making and keep students on track, particularly for first-generation students and others with little experience of both college and careers.

14 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education Colleges and universities have the responsibility to advance the cause of better 7 precollege education. The most fundamental way every college and university can help improve p-12 education is to ensure that its own students receive a high-quality education so that graduates who seek a teaching career will have a strong understanding of the subject matter they wish to teach. What a particular college can do depends on its circumstances. Many work directly with teachers and administrations in their local communities to clarify expectations and smooth pathways, create pipe- line programs that prepare elementary and high school students for college, and engage in dual-enrollment programs and early college initiatives—all of which can improve college readiness, reduce the need for remediation, and increase college persistence and completion. Some universities have schools of education whose students are a big part of the region’s teaching force, and these institutions need to ensure that their students are well equipped for the work they will take up. The wealthiest and most-selective schools can invest in actively recruiting students from disadvantaged backgrounds throughout the nation and can help neighboring communities to advance opportunities for all college-going youth.

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 15 NATIONAL PRIORITY THREE

Control Costs and Increase Affordability

Priority Three Recommendations

CONTROL COSTS AND INCREASE AFFORDABILITY TO MAKE UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION FINANCIALLY ACCESSIBLE TO ALL WHO CAN BENEFIT.

The Commission believes that, no matter how high the quality of an undergraduate education, it cannot serve its purpose if it is not financially accessible to all who can benefit. In an environment of continuing financial constraint, colleges and governments must put their limited resources where they will do the most good in realizing this commitment. In the Commission’s view, this means targeting institutional operating funds toward programs that promote efficiency and effectiveness in getting students to completion and targeting state and federal support to students who need it most in the programs in which they are most likely to succeed. Increasing the rates at which students succeed in completing their undergraduate programs in a timely way is likely the best antidote to unmanageable student debt. Across-the-board spending cuts are good at avoiding tough choices, but deliberate decisions about where to invest and where to cut back have much greater promise for controlling costs while promoting quality and completion. More broadly, while addressing the challenge of low success rates for a significant portion of the population will require significant investments in the near term, in the long run it will return significant and measurable long-term economic and civic dividends. Strengthening college completion should be seen as an investment in human infrastructure that is critical to the nation’s long-term economic vitality and social cohesion.

The Commission makes the following recommendations for improvement related to controlling costs and increasing affordability.

The federal student grant and loan programs play a valuable—in fact, irreplace- 1 able—role in the American system of financing higher education, but the nation’s aid system is far more complex and confusing than it needs to be, and too much public money is being wasted. The recommendations below should be comple- mented by more comprehensive interventions that help students understand the potential earnings and debt levels associated with various college credentials and career paths, prevent students from excessive borrowing, and encourage students to complete their credentials in a timely way. The federal government should:

Take further steps to simplify or even eliminate the fafsa-based a student aid application process, relying more on financial information already available from the Internal Revenue Service to determine eligibility.

16 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education The Pell system should provide grants that support students com- b pleting 30 credits anytime throughout the course of a calendar year, allowing students to take classes when they can and to complete their credentials in a timely fashion.

Design a single income-driven repayment plan in which students c are automatically enrolled and loan payments are collected through the income tax system. The plan should include fiscally responsible repayment rates to limit the need for future debt forgiveness.

Develop guidelines for colleges and universities whose students are d systematically unable to repay their federal loans to reimburse the government a fraction of the unpaid balance. Institutional risk-sharing that gives a college or university a financial stake in their students’ success at school and afterward appears to be a promising innovation and should be tested, provided that institutions continue to honor their access-related missions and stand behind their commitments to high-risk students.

Track student progress across institutions and provide access to e continued aid based upon satisfactory academic progress across multiple institutions. Under the current system, too many “swirling” students move from institution to institution piling up debt without earning a degree, resulting in significant debt and high risk of loan default.

Revise eligibility rules so as not to allow federal financial aid to f follow students to low-performing institutions that have extremely low graduation rates. g Develop incentives for states to sustain funding for public higher education institutions and, where possible, to increase it. Federal and state governments should focus their dollars on comprehensive supports and incentives to improve the chances of students from low- and moderate-income backgrounds earning college credentials of value.

Experiment with and carefully assess alternatives for students to h manage the financing of their college education. For example, income-share agreements allow college students to borrow from colleges or investors, which then receive a percentage of the student’s after-graduation income.

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 17 NATIONAL PRIORITY THREE

Control Costs and Increase Affordability

The states historically have exercised primary responsibility for funding and 2 oversight of public colleges and universities, and this core state responsibility should continue—it is a duty states owe to their residents, as the majority of those who go to college attend their local public higher education institutions. States must ensure that their public institutions are provided with adequate funding to fulfill their missions, in particular those that serve the most disadvantaged students. However, an overall decline in state support represents a central challenge to the core missions of public institutions. Fiscal pressures on states and on state-run colleges and universities are likely to be unrelenting, and it is essential that both government decision-makers and leaders on campus focus on directing resources to the highest priorities:

Direct scarce resources to the students for whom they will have the a greatest impact. State governments must weigh carefully the balance of their funding across types of public institutions, recognizing the distinc- tive contributions made by research universities, regional comprehensives, and community colleges. Because the roles of these different types of institution vary greatly, as do the backgrounds and aspirations of their students, no simple formula can determine how much support each institution should receive from the state. While the balance of priorities will and should vary among states according to a state’s needs and opportunities, the Commission believes that every state should attend effectively to the needs of its most disadvantaged students, wherever they enroll.

State-run student aid programs should prioritize meeting the b financial need of highly disadvantaged students. Without additional funding to supplement federal grant assistance, many qualified students may be unable to attend the public flagship or even a nearby community college.

Policy-makers should work with colleges and universities toward c improved alignment between funding and program completion. Per- formance-based funding systems are showing mixed results; continually evaluating these systems and modifying them based on evidence of effectiveness and unintended consequences holds real promise.

Coordinate state agencies in developing comprehensive student d support strategies. Many students, whether coming straight out of high school or adults returning later to college, face multiple social and personal challenges that can range from homelessness and food insecurity to childcare, psychological challenges, and even imprisonment. The best

18 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education solutions can often emerge from building cooperation between a college and relevant social support agencies. These are innovations that states can do a good deal to support and even subsidize.

In the constrained financial environment that exists now and that the Commis- 3 sion believes lies ahead, colleges and universities must continue to be more effective at managing their costs and directing scarce resources smartly if they are to meet the goals of more equitable access and increased completion. Building on the difficult and serious steps many institutions have already taken, the following areas deserve particular emphasis:

Invest in providing students with consistently good teaching. Good a teaching raises student learning and satisfaction and raises persistence in challenging majors, as well as degree completion. Once in place, strong and effective instructional systems can better meet institutional and social goals without being more expensive than the less-reliable teaching practices they replace.

Build governance practices that support cost-saving innovation. b Colleges and universities of all types need to develop a more robust conception of “shared governance” than has historically been the case. Even though faculty, administrators, and trustees view the institution through different lenses, they share an interest in the institution’s financial success and, even more, its vitality in achieving its mission. Achieving shared goals will require greater openness and more candid discussion among all parties than currently prevail.

Reduce costs per graduate through timely progression to degree c completion. Institutional reengineering that results in more students completing degrees in a timelier fashion lowers costs per graduate because of the greater effectiveness in producing graduates. Success requires the full effort of the entire campus, including the faculty, in making efficiency- improving adjustments; for example, through timely tracking of student progress.

Direct financial assistance to students who need it. Colleges and d universities should assess their student aid strategies to meet institutional missions and lean toward providing aid to students who are most financially vulnerable.

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 19 NATIONAL PRIORITY THREE

Control Costs and Increase Affordability

Make information about prices, aid, and outcomes more accessible e and transparent to students. Institutions should think carefully about clarity and equity for students as they design their pricing policies.

Federal and state regulatory agencies, as well as regional and disciplinary accred- 4 iting bodies that also hold regulatory sway, should assess institutional effectiveness and guide behavior based on desired practices and outcomes for students rather than focusing primarily on educational inputs:

To promote an increase in responsible innovation, government and a accrediting agencies should track institutional and program performance on priority outcomes such as graduation rates, student debt default and loan repayment rates, and job placement/job success or further education outcomes.

To reduce compliance costs and target resources where they can have b the greatest impact, apply more thorough institutional review to chronically poor performers and reward strong performers by reducing the frequency and scope of regulatory review processes. Reporting requirements should be simplified where possible and better targeted to control bad actors and to assess the quality of new entrants into higher education.

Increasing numbers of colleges and universities struggle to meet c costly federal and state regulatory requirements. The federal and state governments should take steps to consolidate and streamline confusing regulations, review and reduce unfunded mandates where appropri- ate, and eliminate extraneous and tangential rules while retaining and where possible improving worthwhile consumer protections. Regulations, put forth in a clear and comprehensible manner, should be related to education, student safety, and stewardship of federal and state funds. The costs and burdens of regulations should be estimated accurately and regularly.

20 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education Considerations on the Further Future

The fourth section of the report considers a distant future through four lenses: the country’s level of social cohesion; the needs and characteristics of the workforce; the use of Big Data and the level of access to information and advanced educational technologies; and unforeseen natural or human-generated global challenges. The Commission focuses on these factors because they seem the most plausible and pertinent to its principal concerns of quality, completion, and affordability. Speculating on a range of possibilities, the Commission imagines what the nation’s needs may be and how colleges and universities might respond:

In a future that may lean toward greater social division, colleges and universities 1 should play a large and constructive role in promoting greater cohesiveness. As cultural crossroads and sites of reasoned debate, they could set new standards for civility and mutual understanding in a society sorely in need of new models. An increasingly fractured nation will require more common spaces and more opportunities for meaningful interaction, whether they exist physically or virtually.

Advanced robotics, artificial intelligence, and enhanced and virtual reality tech- 2 nologies are all evolving so rapidly that many of the tasks now performed by humans may increasingly come to be performed by machines, while a growing “gig economy” could mean a significantly greater share of the workforce hired on a task- by-task basis. Colleges and universities will need to meet the demand for more shorter- term, flexible options available to students over a lifetime that support a highly skilled, technical, and adaptable workforce. But institutions must also double down on teaching the skills that are most difficult for machines to replicate, such as solving unstruc- tured problems, working flexibly with new information, and working effectively in groups.

The amount of data collected by technology giants like Google, Facebook, and 3 Amazon on their users is seemingly boundless, while the growth in smart- phones and tablets along with the digitization of libraries is making information available across the world at the touch of a screen. Colleges and universities will need to define their own parameters for the collection and use of student data, balancing privacy concerns with the potential of Big Data to help refine and personalize teaching and advising. Colleges and universities may even take the lead in the public debate about the proper use of personal data more generally. The continued expansion of online lectures, digitized textbooks, and wikis of all kinds would not only continue to make information more widely available but could also speed the evolution of teaching.

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 21 SECTION FOUR

The Further Future Considered

The era of the iPhone and the rise of social media have been accompanied by 4 global terrorism, the Great Recession, and an acceleration in the degradation of the natural environment. Colleges and universities are well positioned to help society respond thoughtfully and effectively by examining new ideas, teaching new skills, and producing new research. Their importance will only be amplified in a future charac- terized by transformative discovery or world-changing cataclysm, and they would serve the world more effectively by maintaining a certain level of financial, curricular, and intellectual flexibility in order to meet unforeseen challenges.

Whatever combination of these scenarios should come about—or whatever else comes about that we have not anticipated—the fundamentals of strong undergraduate education this report has identified will continue to be important: High-quality teaching and learning that addresses both students’ practical career needs in conjunction with their more lasting capacities for critical thinking, problem-solving, communication, and civic participation. An educational system that does as much as possible to put students in a position not only to access higher education, but also to succeed in the programs they undertake. Ensuring that educational opportunities are widely available to all who can benefit.

22 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education CONCLUSION

Some members of this Commission have a serving the needs of individuals, or a public deep knowledge of one or another piece of the good, meeting larger civic and community higher education landscape—perhaps public needs. The answer, we are convinced, is that or private research universities, or commu- undergraduate education is both a public and a nity colleges, or institutions with large online private good. Those who invest in an education or competency-based delivery systems. Others are consistently rewarded with higher earn- brought perspectives on undergraduate educa- ings and more stable employment—impor tion from other walks of life—business, tech- tant private benefits. The earnings advantage nology, journalism, and public affairs. But none for college graduates, on the average, has in

Our primary goal in writing this report, therefore, has been to help guide the next stage in the evolution of American undergraduate education, in which all students can afford, complete, and enjoy the benefits of the education they seek when they enroll, an education that truly prepares them for life in the 21st century. of us, even the few who study higher education recent decades been higher than ever before. for a living, had the full picture of this complex Expanding the numbers of degree and certif- and ever-changing mosaic. And we still don’t. icate holders helps individuals and also hon- This is a system that will not sit still with its ors America’s self-understanding as a nation millions of diverse students, thousands of insti- of economic opportunity and strengthens our tutions, and continual adoption of technologi- democracy. Our primary goal in writing this cal and organizational innovations as society’s report, therefore, has been to help guide the needs for education evolve in a changing global next stage in the evolution of American under- economic and political context. Our collective graduate education, in which all students can learning and analysis have left us with a sober afford, complete, and enjoy the benefits of the sense of the great challenges ahead for under- education they seek when they enroll, an edu- graduate education—intellectual, financial, cation that truly prepares them for life in the and ethical—and much of this report aims at 21st century. Beyond the benefits to individu- clarifying their nature and scope and proposing als, though, we also know that more educated effective responses to them. Most of all though, communities are more prosperous and have a as we complete this stage of our work, we come richer civic life—real public benefits of under- away hopeful. graduate education.

There is a long-standing debate about whether As we have explored these benefits more undergraduate education is a private good, deeply, we have come to identify a more pro-

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 23 CONCLUSION

Progress is not guaranteed, and good things will happen only with sustained effort, but if we can sustain focus on the work, combining patience with urgency, we can, through undergraduate education, make great advances as individuals and as a nation. found role that undergraduate education are hopeful because more and more colleges can and indeed must play for the sake of our are learning how to help students succeed in nation’s future. We are a nation polarized—by moving to complete their programs and are race, by class, by political and religious con- developing effective practices that other col- victions, and in other ways. We must, even as leges can emulate. And we are hopeful because we acknowledge and respect difference, find there are real financial changes and technolog- opportunities to knit people and communi- ical opportunities that, if enacted smartly, can ties together on terms of equality and mutual further facilitate student success. Progress is respect. This is not a problem undergraduate not guaranteed, and good things will happen education can “solve,” but colleges and univer- only with sustained effort, but if we can sustain sities are among the few American institutions focus on the work, combining patience with in which significant numbers of people from urgency, we can, through undergraduate edu- different backgrounds and communities come cation, make great advances as individuals and together for a shared purpose. At this juncture, as a nation. our divisions sometimes produce painful and risky confrontations, but they also, less visibly, create opportunities to build relationships and further mutual understanding. This is, in our view, a core component of education and a crucial need for our civic and political future.

We face huge challenges. Yet the reasons for optimism are real. Our remarkably large set of colleges and universities has a greater reach across our population than ever before. For all the challenges and tensions evident on many of today’s campuses, we must remember that the long-run trend on campuses has been toward more diversity and inclusion. We harbor no doubts about the value and benefits of a quality college education—it delivers on its promises of greater individual and social prosperity. We

24 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education ENDNOTES

1. Educational Longitudinal Study of 2002 (els: 2002), https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/els2002. 2. A Primer on the College Student Journey (Cambridge, Mass.: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2016). 3. William H. Frey, “The ‘Diversity Explosion’ Is America’s Twenty-First-Century Baby Boom,” in Our Compel- ling Interests: The Value of Diversity for Democracy and a Prosperous Society, ed. Earl Lewis and Nancy Cantor (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2016), 16–35. 4. A Primer on the College Student Journey, 47, https://www.amacad.org/content/publications/publication.aspx ?d=22363. 5. Ibid. 6. Anthony P. Carnevale, Ban Cheah, and Andrew R. Hanson, The Economic Value of College Majors: Executive Summary (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, 2015), https:// cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/Exec-Summary-web-B.pdf. 7. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, https://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm. 8. oecd, https://data.oecd.org/eduatt/population-with-tertiary-education.htm. 9. Raj Chetty et al., Mobility Report Cards: The Role of Colleges in Intergenerational Mobility, July 2017, http:// www.equality-of-opportunity.org/papers/coll_mrc_paper.pdf. 10. See Claudia Goldin and Lawrence F. Katz, The Race between Education and Technology (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2008). 11. Sophia Koropeckyj, Chris Lafakis, and Adam Ozimek, The Economic Impact of Increasing Completion (Cam- bridge, Mass.: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2017), http://www.amacad.org/cfue.

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 25 APPENDIX A

Commission Members, Staff, and Funder

COMMISSION ON THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION

Commission Chairs Diana Natalicio, President, University of Texas Roger W. Ferguson, Jr., President and ceo, tiaa at El Paso Michael S. McPherson, President Emeritus, Hilary Pennington, Vice President, Ford Foundation Spencer Foundation Beverly Tatum, President Emerita, Spelman College Shirley Tilghman, President Emerita, Commission Members Princeton University Joseph E. Aoun, President, Northeastern Michelle Weise, Senior Vice President for Work- University force Strategies and Chief Innovation Officer, Deborah Loewenberg Ball, William H. Payne Strada Education Network Collegiate Professor, University of Michigan Sandy Baum, Senior Fellow, Urban Institute Data Advisory Group Members Rebecca M. Blank, Chancellor, University of Tom Bailey, George and Abby O’Neill Professor Wisconsin-Madison of Economics and Education, Teachers College, John Seely Brown, former Director, Xerox parc Columbia University Research Sandy Baum, Senior Fellow, Urban Institute Wesley G. Bush, Chairman, ceo, and President, Ronald G. Ehrenberg, Irving M. Ives Professor of Northrop Grumman Industrial and Labor Relations and Carl A. Cohn, Executive Director, California Economics, Cornell University Collaborative for Educational Excellence Bridget Terry Long, Academic Dean and Saris Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., President, Professor of Education and Economics, Purdue University Harvard Graduate School of Education John J. DeGioia, President, Georgetown University Judith Scott-Clayton, Associate Professor of Jonathan F. Fanton, President, American Academy Economics and Education, Teachers College, of Arts and Sciences Columbia University Robert Hormats, Vice Chairman, Kissinger Asso- ciates; former Under Secretary of State for Eco- Project Staff nomic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Francesca Purcell Freeman A. Hrabowski III, President, University Eliza Berg of Maryland, Baltimore County John Tessitore Jennifer L. Jennings, Professor of Sociology and Phyllis Bendell Public Affairs, Princeton University Alison Franklin Jeremy Johnson, Co-Founder and ceo, Andela Heather Mawhiney Sherry Lansing, Founder and ceo, Scott Raymond Sherry Lansing Foundation Peter Walton Nicholas Lemann, Professor and former Dean, Lara Couturier, Consultant Columbia University Graduate School of Richard Kazis, Consultant Journalism J. Michael Locke, former ceo, Rasmussen Inc. Funder Monica Lozano, President and ceo, Carnegie Corporation of New York College Futures Foundation Gail O. Mellow, President, LaGuardia Community College

26 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education APPENDIX B

Groups and Individuals Consulted

STUDENT AND FACULTY MEETINGS WITH ACADEMY DISCUSSION GROUPS MEMBERS AND AFFILIATES The Commission met with nearly 200 students and The Commission met with more than 50 Academy faculty members to gather perspectives and discuss members and experts to discuss the work of the concerns about the future of American undergrad- Commission. uate education. May 19, 2015 September 15, 2016 New York, NY Northeastern University May 20, 2015 Boston, MA Cambridge, MA September 20, 2016 June 4, 2015 LaGuardia Community College Chicago, IL New York, NY June 16, 2015 February 6, 2017 Washington, DC University of Texas, El Paso El Paso, TX July 1, 2015 Stanford, CA April 11, 2017 Babson College November 13, 2016 Wellesley, MA Los Angeles, CA April 18, 2017 December 12, 2016 Eastern Connecticut State University New York, NY Willimantic, CT February 7, 2017 April 24, 2017 Austin, TX University of Wisconsin-Madison April 19, 2017 Madison, WI Cambridge, MA April 25, 2017 Rasmussen College Chicago, IL

THE FUTURE OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION, THE FUTURE OF AMERICA 27 APPENDIX B

Groups and Individuals Consulted

CONGRESSIONAL VISITS ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSIONS The Commission met with 21 members of Con- March 21, 2017 gress and their key legislative advisors. Of the indi- Boulder, CO viduals consulted, 47 percent were Republicans, Commission members met with educational technol- 53 percent were Democrats, 38 percent were from ogy experts, including David Figlio (Northwestern the Senate, and 62 percent were from the House of University), Charles Isbell (Georgia Institute of Tech- Representatives. nology), Stephen Kosslyn (Minerva Schools at kgi), September 13–14, 2016 and Peter Smith (University of Maryland University October 3–4, 2016 College), about the role of technology and online pro- March 30–31, 2017 grams in undergraduate education.

March 29, 2017 HIGHER EDUCATION ORGANIZATIONS Washington, DC AND FOUNDATIONS Commission members met with experts on higher The Commission met with 25 leaders and staff from education–workforce partnerships, including Wes national higher education groups and foundations, Bush (Northrop Grumman), Brian Fitzgerald (The including: Business-Higher Education Forum), Dane Linn (Business Roundtable), and Stan Litow (ibm), American Association of Community Colleges about ways for the business community to support American Association of State Colleges underserved students and specific examples of pro- and Universities grams that could be scaled or replicated. American Council on Education Association of American Universities Association of Public and Land-grant Universities The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Center for American Progress Knight Foundation Lumina Foundation National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities National Center for Higher Education Management Systems New America The Public Policy Institute of California State Higher Education Executive Officers Association Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education

28 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education american academy of arts & sciences Cherishing Knowledge, Shaping the Future

Since its founding in 1780, the American Academy has served the nation as a champion of scholarship, civil dialogue, and useful knowledge.

As one of the nation’s oldest learned societies and independent policy research centers, the Academy convenes leaders from the academic, business, and government sectors to examine the critical issues facing our global society.

Through studies, publications, and programs on Science, Engineering, and Technology; Global Security and International Affairs; Education and the Development of Knowledge; The Humanities, Arts, and Culture; and American Institutions, Society, and the Public Good, the Academy provides authoritative and nonpartisan policy advice to decision-makers in government, academia, and the private sector. @americanacad www.amacad.org